Readers Write: “The Partial Observer” is a column title used frequently in our publications to clearly identify an opinion piece, and/or that the author has some sort of personal or professional interest in the topic about which they are writing. These commentaries reflect on myriad current political, economic, and social situations in this county, this country, and abroad. The content of such submissions should not be construed to be representative of the views of “The Freeman’s Journal,” “Hometown Oneonta,” or AllOtsego.com. In the interests of our readers and with the right and privilege of free speech in mind, we continue to print “partial observer” pieces as we deem relevant.

The Partial Observer by Marie Loper

The Partial Observer: Rehabilitation Support Services Model is ‘Flawed, Unsafe’

Christine Nealon’s October 2nd piece [“Solstice Commons—a Thoughtful Step Forward for Oneonta”] painted a lovely picture of the proposed Rehabilition Support Services development in Oneonta’s 6th Ward named “Solstice Commons.” Of course, that’s her job—to make sure these facilities get built. But beneath that polished presentation lie some uncomfortable truths.

I want to focus on what Ms. Nealon glosses over: safety. I have never lived anywhere as safe as Oneonta. I grew up in low-income housing, and have spent the majority of my life in neighborhoods where women couldn’t run alone at night or early morning. Where walking your dogs in the dark—no matter what their size—was dangerous. Here, it’s different. Moms push strollers at all hours without fear. Kids ride bikes and walk to school or to each other’s homes for sleepovers, day or night. Just the other evening, I sat on my porch after midnight and watched a group of teenage girls in pajamas walk from one house to another. The sense of security here is real and rare. It’s a cornerstone of why we live here.

Ms. Nealon mentions the values of “dignity, community, and mutual care.” These are the very values that Oneonta and the 6th Ward already embody. Here, neighbors wave as they walk their dogs, stop to compliment new siding or holiday decorations, or simply ask how you’re doing. My neighbor told me about the generations who’ve lived in my house, across the street, and around the corner. Another recently said how nice it is to see more young families moving in—more children playing outside than in years past. This is the community we’ve chosen to call home.

Unfortunately, this is also what RSS risks destroying—not through low-income housing for families or seniors, which we would welcome, but through their “supportive housing” model, which has a troubling track record in communities like ours. Particularly a community where there is an elementary school, three daycares, and the Boys and Girls Club all within walking distance of the proposed site.

In her piece, Ms. Nealon asked readers to imagine having everything going for you, then losing a loved one and spiraling into depression. But let’s imagine something else. It’s 2016. You’re a 23-year-old woman leaving an elementary school in Albany. You’re kidnapped at knifepoint, tied to a table in your attacker’s RSS apartment, and brutalized. Your attacker, Jose Marlett, is sentenced to 110 years to life for eight counts of predatory sexual assault, five counts of rape and other charges.

You later sue RSS after learning he lived in their “supportive housing” and was supposed to be under their direct care. According to court records and [reflecting upon] Ms. Nealon’s own words from her October 2nd piece:

• RSS knew Marlett was dangerous before housing him, yet deemed him “eligible through rigorous screening consistent with state and federal Fair Housing Regulations.”
• His application listed, for “serious mental illness” was not “major depression,” but bipolar disorder, schizoaffective disorder, delusions, hallucinations, paranoia, as well as both suicidal and homicidal ideations. RSS identified his risks as “suicide and violence,” noting a history of altercations, threats, and harm to others.
• Despite being “staffed 24/7” like Solstice Commons is supposed to be, RSS could not restrict his movements within the facility or community.
• The director confirmed in court documents that residents are not required to take medication or attend counseling. At an April 1st meeting with downtown business and property owners, Ms. Nealon herself said, “Taking advantage of support services is voluntary, not mandatory.”

When sued, RSS argued “the nonprofit corporation had no duty to control and supervise Marlett, a prior felon” and that “legally, defendants—a stranger to the plaintiff—do not owe her a duty of care.” In plain English, RSS claimed it bears no responsibility to keep the public safe.

So when Ms. Nealon states that RSS as a company stands for “dignity, community, and mutual care,” we must ask—where were those values then? Because when something goes wrong, they vanish behind legal disclaimers and public relations spin. That’s not safety. That’s not community care. And it’s certainly not transparency.

I spent nearly 20 years working in mental health and substance abuse treatment. I know firsthand how vital those services are—and I believe in supporting people who need help. But what RSS offers is not that. Their “supportive housing” model is flawed and unsafe.

I cannot promise the worst-case scenario will happen here. But Ms. Nealon and RSS cannot promise it won’t. And I, for one, am not willing to take those odds. Are you?

Marie Loper, PhD, is a resident of the Town of Oneonta.

Editor’s note: We reached out to Christine Nealon with due diligence regarding the incident described here. This is Nealon’s response: “Confidentiality laws restrict us from discussing this specific matter as related to any clients that may or may not have been served by Rehabilitation Support Services. However, we can say the proposed Solstice Commons development is a very different model of housing than what is being referenced. It is designed as a safe and community-responsive apartment complex with on-site and real-time support provided by RSS to help residents thrive within their community. Prospective tenants will undergo screening for eligibility consistent with Fair Housing regulations and applicable state and federal guidelines. Our focus is on collaboration, transparency, and ensuring this development is a positive and safe addition to our community.”